Space efficiency in timber office buildings

dc.authoridIlgin, Huseyin Emre/0000-0001-8033-7823
dc.authoridASLANTAMER, Ozlem Nur/0000-0001-7776-607X
dc.authorscopusid59124803900
dc.authorscopusid57079996200
dc.authorwosidASLANTAMER, Ozlem Nur/JNT-0231-2023
dc.contributor.authorAslantamer, Özlem Nur
dc.contributor.authorIlgin, Huseyin Emre
dc.contributor.otherInterior Architecture and Environmental Design
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-05T15:23:09Z
dc.date.available2024-07-05T15:23:09Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.departmentAtılım Universityen_US
dc.department-temp[Aslantamer, Ozlem Nur] Atilim Univ, Fac Art Design & Architecture, Dept Interior Architecture & Environm Design, Ankara, Turkiye; [Ilgin, Huseyin Emre] Tampere Univ, Fac Built Environm, Sch Architecture, Tampere, Finlanden_US
dc.descriptionIlgin, Huseyin Emre/0000-0001-8033-7823; ASLANTAMER, Ozlem Nur/0000-0001-7776-607Xen_US
dc.description.abstractTimber offices indicate a growing field, principally thanks to their potential to offer noteworthy ecological and financial gains over their entire life. Like many other building types, space efficiency is a crucial design parameter in timber structures to ensure a project's feasibility. This factor is especially significant in office buildings, where maximizing rental income reflects effective planning. Currently, there is a lack of exhaustive inquiry providing a thorough insight of space efficiency in modern timber office buildings. This study fills this gap in the literature by collecting data from 33 buildings through literature reviews and case study method to investigate space efficiency with the key architectural and structural factors that influence it. The results showed that: (i) central cores stood out as the prevailing core layouts, while peripheral arrangements were noted as alternative preferences. Prismatic shapes emerged as the most favored options; (ii) timber was extensively used as a primary building material, closely followed by combinations of timber and concrete. Load-bearing systems mainly relied on shear walled frames and configurations; (iii) average space utilization across examined cases was 88 %, with variances ranging from 75 % to 95 % among different instances; (iv) average ratio of core area to GFA was 10 %, showing variations between 4 % and 19 % across various scenarios; and (v) there were no substantial variances noted in the effect of different core planning strategies on spatial efficiency. Similar conclusions were drawn regarding building forms and structural materials. Our paper will assist in crafting design principles customized for diverse stakeholders, including architectural designers of timber offices.en_US
dc.identifier.citation0
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jobe.2024.109618
dc.identifier.issn2352-7102
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85193448100
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.109618
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14411/2268
dc.identifier.volume91en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001244546900001
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectTimberen_US
dc.subjectOfficeen_US
dc.subjectGross floor area (GFA)en_US
dc.subjectNet floor area (NFA)en_US
dc.subjectSpace efficiencyen_US
dc.titleSpace efficiency in timber office buildingsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationdd5c751a-ea52-4ff2-88ae-a0970df7ca77
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoverydd5c751a-ea52-4ff2-88ae-a0970df7ca77
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication4655bfd7-34bf-42d6-aeea-39f55557214b
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery4655bfd7-34bf-42d6-aeea-39f55557214b

Files

Collections